Several right-wing media outlets have breathlessly scandalized a stolen email released by WikiLeaks showing President Obama received emails from Hillary Clinton’s private email server while she was secretary of state. These outlets claim the email proves Obama lied when he claimed to have learned about her private email server from news reports about it, even though the White House clarified over a year ago that while the president knew her email address, he did not know about the server.

Media should report on the immense hypocrisy of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump levying attacks on former President Bill Clinton’s history with women and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s responses to those women.Trump and several of his closest advisers have long histories of engaging in infidelity, workplace sexual harassment, and misogynistic behavior. Trump himself has also called Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky “totally unimportant,” and, The Washington Post reported, he “repeatedly dismissed and at times mocked” the women who have accused Bill Clinton.

Fox News is mischaracterizing remarks Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton made at a private fundraiser in February, falsely claiming that she was mocking Bernie Sanders’ supporters as “broke and delusional.” In the audio of the remarks, which security officials believe was originally hacked by Russian government operatives and then later posted by the Washington Free Beacon, Clinton is highlighting the “sense of disappointment among young people in politics” and why they were driven to support Sanders.

When media report on Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s latest attacks on former President Bill Clinton’s history with women and Hillary Clinton’s responses to those women, they should also mention the immense hypocrisy of Trump levying those claims. Trump and several of his closest advisers have long histories of infidelity, workplace sexual harassment, and misogyny. And Trump himself previously said both that Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky was “totally unimportant” and that people would have been more “forgiving” if Clinton had a relationship “with a really beautiful woman.”

There is no Donald Trump lie better-documented than his constantly repeated falsehood that he opposed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. During last night’s debate, he was pummeled on the issue by moderator Lester Holt and numerous fact-checkers. Dutifully doing damage control for the Republican nominee, Fox News is now trying to obscure the record, claiming that “history backs The Donald.”

As numerous fact-checkers have noted, contrary to his claims that he was “totally against the war in Iraq” from the beginning, in 2002, more than six months before the invasion of Iraq, Trump was asked by radio host Howard Stern if he was “for invading Iraq.” He responded, “Yeah, I guess so. You know, I wish the first time it was done correctly.”

Trump struggled to explain why he keeps lying about this during the September 26 debate as Holt repeatedly pointed out that he had originally supported the war. At one point, Trump claimed that he had done “an interview with [Fox News anchor] Neil Cavuto” which he claimed vindicated him.

But the Cavuto interview in question has been reviewed by numerous fact-checkers that concluded it did not support his claims to be against the war. Fox News, on the other hand, is ready and willing to use the interview to clear Trump of a months-long campaign of lies.

An unbylined FoxNews.com article claimed Trump was right, reporting that the January 2003 interview “backs up Trump on Iraq War opposition”:

After all the clamor for moderators to fact-check the candidates during Monday night's presidential debate, Donald Trump flipped the script on Lester Holt by rejecting his assertion Trump backed the war in Iraq - and history backs The Donald.

[...]

Cavuto himself picked up the thread post-debate on Fox Business Network, unearthing the clip Trump referenced, from January 28, 2003 – Nearly two months before the Iraq War began on March 20. In the video, Cavuto asks Trump how much time President Bush should spend on the economy vs. on Iraq.

“Well, I’m starting to think that people are much more focused now on the economy,” Trump said. “They’re getting a little bit tired of hearing ‘We’re going in, we’re not going in.’ Whatever happened to the days of Douglas MacArthur? Either do it or don’t do it.”

Trump continued: “Perhaps he shouldn’t be doing it yet. And perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations.”

Fox’s article ignores that Trump’s comments came three months after the war was authorized; that Trump did not explicitly say he opposed the invasion during that interview; or that Trump again did not say that he opposed the invasion in a subsequent interview with Cavuto in March 2003, after the war began, when he said that it “looks like a tremendous success from a military standpoint.”

BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski called the Fox article “embarrassing” and “complete bullshit,” noting that fact-checkers had reviewed the “unearth[ed]” clip and concluded that it did not support Trump’s claims, while Fox had framed it “exactly how Trump wanted you to.” Indeed:

CNN has reported that Trump “never said [the war] should not be undertaken” during the Cavuto interview, adding, “It wasn't until August 2004 -- 17 months after the invasion began and the war was being widely criticized -- that Trump came out fully against the war.” CNN concluded that Trump had lied about being against the war from the start.

Factcheck.org noted that Trump “offers no opinion on what Bush should do” during the January 2003 Cavuto interview, concluding that there is “no evidence” Trump fought against the invasion.

The Washington Post FactChecker blog has repeatedlyreferenced the Cavuto quote, noting that Trump did not take a position on the invasion during that interview and frequently criticizing Trump’s claims about opposing the war from the beginning as “bogus.”

PolitiFact pointed out that Trump “didn’t speak against going to war” during the Cavuto interview, concluding that Trump’s claims about opposing the war are false.

Only Fox News is willing to claim that the Cavuto interview “backs The Donald.” That’s not surprising given their months-long campaign in support of Trump.

UPDATE: As Kaczynski and Post Fact Checker reporter Michelle Ye Hee Lee have pointed out, Cavuto aired the same January 2003 interview clip in February. But at the time, Cavuto said that Trump's January 2003 comments "could have left you with a different impression" than Trump's false claim that he had always opposed the war. Cavuto added that Trump was "not bashing the president ... nor is he fully endorsing Iraq, but he's saying some clear decision is required."

Fox host Neil Cavuto argued that America doesn’t have a problem with strong women, evidencing his claim by noting 104 women currently serve in Congress and 21 are Fortune 500 CEOs, both figures well below the 50 percent population of women in America.

On the September 20 edition of his Fox News show, Cavuto pushed back against a statement made by President Obama that America hasn’t had a woman president because we still grapple with the idea of “strong women,” arguing that Americans “have a problem with this woman.” Cavuto noted that because women are currently represented in government and business, “America doesn’t seem to have a problem electing women”:

NEIL CAVUTO (HOST): Now I know how the president will handle a possible Hillary Clinton loss. She wouldn’t have anything to do with it and god knows he wouldn’t have anything to do with it. Turns out chauvinist unenlightened Neanderthal voters will have everything to do with it. Quoting the president from a new York fundraiser in Manhattan this past weekend: “There's a reason we haven't had a woman president. We as a society still grapple with what it means to see powerful women. And it still troubles us in a lot of ways unfairly, and that expresses itself in all sorts of ways.”

Are you kidding me? Hillary Clinton loses and it's because we have a problem with powerful women? Could it be if she loses we have a problem with this woman? Because looking around we Americans don’t seem to have a problem electing women. Last time I checked, there were 104 women in Congress, 84 in the House, 20 in the Senate, six women governors. And don't forget the 21 women who are Fortune 500 CEO's. Could we have more? Absolutely. But if we have a problem with powerful women our country sure has a funny way of showing it.

While there have been gains in female representation in the U.S. government, women hold only 104 seats out of the 535 seats in Congress -- barely 20% of the government even though women make up half of the US population. The Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University noted that three states have never had a female congressional representative: Delaware, Vermont, and Mississippi. Additionally, as of this year, 23 states have never had a female governor or elected a female senator.

And while there are 21 female CEOs, that’s only 4 percent of all Fortune 500 CEOs. That number is a drop from the previous year, where there were 24 female CEOs, according to a report by Forbes. Cavuto’s exaggeration of the presence of female CEOs in the business world mirrors the results of a survey of executives which found “Executives vastly overestimated the number of women who are chief executive officers.”

On December 7, President-elect Donald Trump named Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt as his pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency. Media should take note of Pruitt’s climate science denial, his deep ties to the energy industries he will be charged with regulating, and his long record of opposition to EPA efforts to reduce air and water pollution and combat climate change.

President-elect Donald Trump has picked -- or considered -- nearly a dozen people who have worked in right-wing media, including talk radio, right-wing news sites, Fox News, and conservative newspapers, to fill his administration. And Trump himself made weekly guest appearances on Fox for a number of years while his vice president used to host a conservative talk radio show.